FCC to Smack Sprint with $105M Cramming Fine
Just a cash grab by the .gov
Im guessing VZW is next up, and if not, all the other big carriers should countersue.
They ALL allowed premium text message scams, I mean "features", and the FCC ignored complaints about them for many years prior.
Many people got huge cellular bills (and also got their lines shut off, and ETF fees) because someone on their account texted JOKE, and when they contacted the carrier, were told "we cant help you".
We also don't have valid contact details for that service, but try to reply "STOP" or "QUIT" or maybe "PLEASE SOMEONE HELP ME THEY ARE GOING TO SUSPEND MY LINES OF SERVICE FOR THESE BS FEES YOU KEEP CHARGING ME".
It got a little easier to cancel towards the end but are any of those people getting commensurate money back from ...
(continues)
They ALL allowed premium text message scams, I mean "features", and the FCC ignored complaints about them for many years prior.
Many people got huge cellular bills (and also got their lines shut off, and ETF fees) because someone on their account texted JOKE, and when they contacted the carrier, were told "we cant help you".
We also don't have valid contact details for that service, but try to reply "STOP" or "QUIT" or maybe "PLEASE SOMEONE HELP ME THEY ARE GOING TO SUSPEND MY LINES OF SERVICE FOR THESE BS FEES YOU KEEP CHARGING ME".
It got a little easier to cancel towards the end but are any of those people getting commensurate money back from ...
(continues)
...
Considering the context of your post, I didn't understand why you said this, "Just a cash grab by the .gov' until I read this, "but are any of those people getting commensurate money back from these "settlements"?"
While I totally agree with the government holding these companies accountable, it does seem rather pointless and unethical if they aren't reimbursing the customers who were defrauded in the first place. That being said, I am not against fining the companies beyond the actual damages and would not consider such a fine a cash grab. The reason is that big companies will often do things that are unethical or even illegal as long as they stand to gain enough profit to offset any judgments against them. Hitting them with a fine bigge...
(continues)
While I totally agree with the government holding these companies accountable, it does seem rather pointless and unethical if they aren't reimbursing the customers who were defrauded in the first place. That being said, I am not against fining the companies beyond the actual damages and would not consider such a fine a cash grab. The reason is that big companies will often do things that are unethical or even illegal as long as they stand to gain enough profit to offset any judgments against them. Hitting them with a fine bigge...
(continues)
...
Zpike said:...
Considering the context of your post, I didn't understand why you said this, "Just a cash grab by the .gov' until I read this, "but are any of those people getting commensurate money back from these "settlements"?"
While I totally agree with the government holding these companies accountable, it does seem rather pointless and unethical if they aren't reimbursing the customers who were defrauded in the first place. That being said, I am not against fining the companies beyond the actual damages and would not consider such a fine a cash grab. The reason is that big companies will often do things that are unethical or even illegal as long as they stand to gain enough profit to offset any judgments against them
(continues)
...
Yes and no, if Sprint (or any other carrier) acts as the agent in billing as a pass through form their customers and getting some payment from that vendor. Then yes, they are involved.
...
Agreed.
Unless there was no sort of charge notice provided then these charges should be on the consumer. Government shouldn't really be a babysitter or replace personal responsibility. In cases where some of these 3rd party vendors are scamming customers then, yes, they should be fined and made to repay the consumers they defrauded. Those joke premium message companies are perfect examples of proven scams. I just don't think parents not being aware of in-app purchases made by their kids qualifies as a scam. There are options to block in-app purchases and any app my kids get sends me an email. Ignorance isn't an excuse.
Unless there was no sort of charge notice provided then these charges should be on the consumer. Government shouldn't really be a babysitter or replace personal responsibility. In cases where some of these 3rd party vendors are scamming customers then, yes, they should be fined and made to repay the consumers they defrauded. Those joke premium message companies are perfect examples of proven scams. I just don't think parents not being aware of in-app purchases made by their kids qualifies as a scam. There are options to block in-app purchases and any app my kids get sends me an email. Ignorance isn't an excuse.
...
Yup!
The only way that anyone can get signed up for one of these is if they voluntarily give their phone number to the company.
And if they are stupid and do sign up for one of these, then it is their responsibility to look at their bill every month and see what they are being charged for, and ask for the charges to be refunded and the purchases blocked the very first time they show up.
I have zero compassion or sympathy for the idiots who get signed up for some feature, or some mobile subscription, pay for it for months or a year or longer, and then when they discover the charge demand to be credited for it.
When I worked for at&t I once talked to a woman who had the at&t Navigator (GPS navigation) on her account, and she wanted...
(continues)
The only way that anyone can get signed up for one of these is if they voluntarily give their phone number to the company.
And if they are stupid and do sign up for one of these, then it is their responsibility to look at their bill every month and see what they are being charged for, and ask for the charges to be refunded and the purchases blocked the very first time they show up.
I have zero compassion or sympathy for the idiots who get signed up for some feature, or some mobile subscription, pay for it for months or a year or longer, and then when they discover the charge demand to be credited for it.
When I worked for at&t I once talked to a woman who had the at&t Navigator (GPS navigation) on her account, and she wanted...
(continues)
...
>>I said it was because our policy was to refund charges only for the last 90 days, and that it is her responsibility to look at her monthly bill and find out what she is being charged for....if she is paying for a feature for 3 years and is not even aware of it, then that is her fault.
If that was what this cramming suit was about, I would agree with you completely. But it's not.
If that was what this cramming suit was about, I would agree with you completely. But it's not.
...
>>Why does the service provider need to act as a child-proof baby sitter for your stupidity?
They don't. They just don't get to scam people. There's reason why scams are illegal. It's not "OK" to take advantage of people just because you're smart enough to trick them into something they obviously don't want. Way are you so full of hate for the common man?
>>They're not an insurance company for ignorance.
No, but ethics are ethics and they apply to everyone, even the companies who write your paycheck. The same can be said for the law.
>>You have very little self accountability - it's apparently clear in both your posts.
It's clear in ALL of your posts that you're an old miser who hates children. The only good thing about your...
(continues)
They don't. They just don't get to scam people. There's reason why scams are illegal. It's not "OK" to take advantage of people just because you're smart enough to trick them into something they obviously don't want. Way are you so full of hate for the common man?
>>They're not an insurance company for ignorance.
No, but ethics are ethics and they apply to everyone, even the companies who write your paycheck. The same can be said for the law.
>>You have very little self accountability - it's apparently clear in both your posts.
It's clear in ALL of your posts that you're an old miser who hates children. The only good thing about your...
(continues)
...
"Old miser who hates children"? 🤣
Yes, because when my parents taught me to be responsible they also instilled the lesson of hate of children when I turn old.
How does one equate to the other? Don't bother answering. They do not correlate. I don't plan on speaking for pandabear here but I can't imagine he or anyone else here is claiming that legitimate claims be dismissed. What we are discussing is whether or not things like in-app purchases are actually scams. I do not believe they are as any app you download will tell you whether or not that is a feature of the app. I have to say that I find it disturbing how you stretched his opinion all over the place to demonize him with things he never actually said. That was a little bit coo-c...
(continues)
Yes, because when my parents taught me to be responsible they also instilled the lesson of hate of children when I turn old.
How does one equate to the other? Don't bother answering. They do not correlate. I don't plan on speaking for pandabear here but I can't imagine he or anyone else here is claiming that legitimate claims be dismissed. What we are discussing is whether or not things like in-app purchases are actually scams. I do not believe they are as any app you download will tell you whether or not that is a feature of the app. I have to say that I find it disturbing how you stretched his opinion all over the place to demonize him with things he never actually said. That was a little bit coo-c...
(continues)
...
>>"Old miser who hates children"? Laughing
Yes, because when my parents taught me to be responsible they also instilled the lesson of hate of children when I turn old.
That was intended to make the point that it's not wise to make unfounded inferences about people's character. It wasn't supposed to be taken literally.
>>How does one equate to the other? Don't bother answering. They do not correlate.
They're not supposed to. See above.
>>I don't plan on speaking for pandabear here but
Then don't.
>> I can't imagine he or anyone else here is claiming that legitimate claims be dismissed.
The lawsuit is over legitimate claims. If you oppose the lawsuit, you oppose the legitimate claims by proxy. So, everyone here claimin...
(continues)
Yes, because when my parents taught me to be responsible they also instilled the lesson of hate of children when I turn old.
That was intended to make the point that it's not wise to make unfounded inferences about people's character. It wasn't supposed to be taken literally.
>>How does one equate to the other? Don't bother answering. They do not correlate.
They're not supposed to. See above.
>>I don't plan on speaking for pandabear here but
Then don't.
>> I can't imagine he or anyone else here is claiming that legitimate claims be dismissed.
The lawsuit is over legitimate claims. If you oppose the lawsuit, you oppose the legitimate claims by proxy. So, everyone here claimin...
(continues)
...
Zpike said:
>>"Old miser who hates children"? Laughing
Yes, because when my parents taught me to be responsible they also instilled the lesson of hate of children when I turn old.
That was intended to make the point that it's not wise to make unfounded inferences about people's character. It wasn't supposed to be taken literally.
There was no real indication that your comment was anything more than an insult.
>>How does one equate to the other? Don't bother answering. They do not correlate.
They're not supposed to. See above.
I don't buy that.
>>I don't plan on speaking for pandabear here but
Then don't.
I didn't. Glad we cleared tha...
(continues)
...
I still don't get how these services are a scam. You accept terms when you download an app that lay out the pricing of the app. When you do those text in services off those late night commercials they all say at the bottom of the screen that there are subscription charges.
Sure it's hard to read if you don't have DVR but you can for sure see that there is a bunch of fine print and if you don't take it upon yourself to know what your getting into before joining an advertised service then it's your own fault.
There is a big difference between tricks in advertising and scams. If you go to purchase something online that is advertised at $100, you enter in your card info without looking at the total and you get charged $200 (come to find...
(continues)
Sure it's hard to read if you don't have DVR but you can for sure see that there is a bunch of fine print and if you don't take it upon yourself to know what your getting into before joining an advertised service then it's your own fault.
There is a big difference between tricks in advertising and scams. If you go to purchase something online that is advertised at $100, you enter in your card info without looking at the total and you get charged $200 (come to find...
(continues)
...
The sad part of your rant is that each of the major carriers actually IS guilty of 'bill cramming' but these 'mobile subscriptions' are simply not an example of that.
It is in fact all too common for the store agents, working for all 4 carriers, to add features to a customer's account (the most common one being GPS navigation, to the customer's account with the customer's knowledge or consent, simply to increase their own commission. Another common tactic of store agents is to offer a special discount on a phone, say $50 off the normal upgrade price, but only if they agree to add some feature for three months. They can't really do that, it is against policy, but they do it anyway because it increases their commission, '3 months' b...
(continues)
It is in fact all too common for the store agents, working for all 4 carriers, to add features to a customer's account (the most common one being GPS navigation, to the customer's account with the customer's knowledge or consent, simply to increase their own commission. Another common tactic of store agents is to offer a special discount on a phone, say $50 off the normal upgrade price, but only if they agree to add some feature for three months. They can't really do that, it is against policy, but they do it anyway because it increases their commission, '3 months' b...
(continues)
...
>>Now, if this lawsuit was about punishing carriers for the way that store agents intentionally cram charges on to a customer's bill in order to increase their commission, I would be applauding it.
But by definition the term cramming applies to third party charges. You're using the word outside of its legal meaning while talking about its legal ramifications. There may be some other legal term for what you're talking about, but its not cramming.
>>But these mobile subscriptions are a bunch of crap. There is no legitimate reason for this.
Why? Most of these subscriptions are not legitimate and are scams. Plus the charges show up on the customers bill and not on a separate bill sent by the subscription company. The cellular companie...
(continues)
But by definition the term cramming applies to third party charges. You're using the word outside of its legal meaning while talking about its legal ramifications. There may be some other legal term for what you're talking about, but its not cramming.
>>But these mobile subscriptions are a bunch of crap. There is no legitimate reason for this.
Why? Most of these subscriptions are not legitimate and are scams. Plus the charges show up on the customers bill and not on a separate bill sent by the subscription company. The cellular companie...
(continues)
...
Actually, I used to pride myself on my ability to make my own ringtones... back in the day when you couldn't just turn anything you liked into a ringtone. One such process involved converting Nintendo nfs files to qcc files. The tomes of old favorites like Contra and Wizards and Warriors were blaring on my phone when everyone else was stuck with the "Nokia Tone". Once the novelty of making my own tones wore off, I pretty much just stuck to whatever came with my phone. But for the record I have never downloaded a ringtone, let alone gotten crammed as the result of such activity.
...
Zpike said:
Actually, I used to pride myself on my ability to make my own ringtones... back in the day when you couldn't just turn anything you liked into a ringtone. One such process involved converting Nintendo nfs files to qcc files. The tomes of old favorites like Contra and Wizards and Warriors were blaring on my phone when everyone else was stuck with the "Nokia Tone". Once the novelty of making my own tones wore off, I pretty much just stuck to whatever came with my phone. But for the record I have never downloaded a ringtone, let alone gotten crammed as the result of such activity.
Oh okay. I thought for a minute that maybe your parents were murdered in a back alley of a movie theater when you w...
(continues)
...
This forum is closed.
